With and without God

One of the most influential publicists in the English-speaking world, Christopher Hitchens, received bad news this year. He was diagnosed with cancer of the esophagus with a fatal prognosis. Hitchens' literary biography dates back decades, he began on the far left and for a time considered himself a Trotskyist. But he, long sympathetic to the plight of the Kurds, supported the US invasion of Iraq, and even as disagreements with the Bush administration over how the war was waged became apparent, he held on to the view that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was a boon for the Iraqis. This position won him many enemies on the left and friends on the right.

But in recent years, this balance has shifted again, trampling all the rules of leftism and rightism: Hitchens has gained a worldwide reputation as a militant atheist, one of the so-called “new atheists” (this group also includes the biologist Richard Dawkins, the philosopher Daniel Dennett and the publicist Sam Harris) , nicknamed, with a reference to the Apocalypse, "four horsemen." Hitchens' brilliant polemical style secured him star status, and the most prominent theologians and clergymen of various religions and denominations took part in disputes with him on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

Despite the misfortune that befell him, Christopher Hitchens continues his journalistic activities and has not yet canceled his planned public appearances in the near future. Vanity Fair, of which he has been a contributor for many years, published his notes on how his life has changed in recent months in connection with the sad marking of the finish line. In addition, the magazine created a page on its website where anyone can wish Hitchens a recovery - in the end, we all walk, if not under God, then under chance. The same pages appeared in other periodicals and blogs. Thousands of people responded, and many of these responses are difficult to read without excitement: as a rule, their authors thank the journalist for the pivotal role that he played in their lives.

„

If we are trying to be decent people, we have to do it without otherworldly help.

”

Of particular interest, however, are the responses of believers, and in this environment opinions are sharply divided. The majority, admittedly, wish Hitchens remission and promise to pray for his recovery, despite his own views on the subject. Some prominent religious figures who have been involved in disputes with Hitchens in the past write about what an intellectual holiday these meetings were for them. In the blogosphere, an initiative was supported to declare September 20 a day of universal “prayer for Hitchens”. It is easy to guess the reaction of the subject of these prayers: he, of course, is grateful, but he does not believe in their effectiveness at all and rightly suspects that in the event of recovery, the merit will be attributed to someone in whom he fundamentally does not believe.

There is, however, a category of believers who are openly rejoicing at the catastrophe that has befallen an unloved author. Not satisfied with this, they delight in describing the unquenchable flame and hellish torments that the Almighty has prepared for the sick in eternity. The reaction itself is easily predictable, but it is tempting to check with these spiteful critics their own pass to the abode of eternal bliss.

There are no deep insights in this story, of course, it confirms what we all understand instinctively. Religion's claim to correct our morality, one of the eternal arguments supposedly in its favor, is a fiction. If we are scoundrels, our atheism will not add anything to this, but faith may well make it worse. And if we try to be decent people, we always have to do it manually, without otherworldly help.